262 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



[August, 



economy cannot be determined until tliey have been tested by some 

 years' use. With regard to first cost, it appears that the advantage 

 of the triangular sleeper is trifling; indeed, if we had not Jfr. Ciibitt's 

 word to the contrary, I should have said that it was inferior even in 

 this particular. Any other advantage resulting from the use of the 

 triangular sleeper, I certainly cannot conceive, except that the ballast 

 can be more easily rammed, in this case no doubt a very great advan- 

 tage, i;;;! from the form of the sleeper it will evidently require that 

 operation very frequently. I shall, however, quote from the descrip- 

 tion, and if any of your readers can explain to me the other advantages 

 stated, I shall consider it a great favour : — 



" The sleepers are of Baltic fir, and are formed by a square balk 

 being diagonally divided so as to cut out four triangular sleepers, 

 which are laid down with the right angle downwards, which form as 

 much bearing surface as one of twice the cubic contents cut out as 

 half a balk, in the usual manner. The advantages arising from this 

 form in the economy of timber, the facility of packing, and the im- 

 proved drainage of the ballast in contact with the sleepers, are pointed 

 out, and the apparent disadvantage of the tendency to act as a wedge 

 is combated, by showing that the inclination of a right angle exceeds 

 the limits within which the principle of the wedge obtains." 



No doubt a sleeper of this form has as much bearing surface as one 

 of twice the cubic contents cut out as half a balk, but it should also 

 be recollected that any weight passing over such a sleeper will exert 

 a pressure increased in the ratio of the square of two to unity, as can 

 easily be seen by resolving the weight in directions perpendicular to 

 the inclined surfaces of the sleepers ; and it must also be noticed that 

 this increased pressure on the ballasting is exerted in the worst 

 direction possible, that is, laterally, where there is nothing to retain the 

 ballast, whereas with the common rectangular sleeper the pressure is 

 vertical, and after the first year the ballasting becomes consolidated, 

 and requires comparatively very little ramming. I think, therefore, 

 that for the first year it may be less expensive to keep a railway 

 laid with triangular sleepers in proper order, but that after the 

 first year the "triangular system" will be found inferior not on'y 

 in point of expense, but also of solidity and firmness. I should 

 certainly be much pleased to learn from Mr. Pope how " the 

 inclination of a right angle exceeds the limits within which the 

 principle of the wedge obtains." Perhaps Mr. Pope could point out 

 these limits : I am sure your readers would also be highly pleased if 

 Mr. Home would publish an account of his series of experiments on 

 the strength of timber, for the results are quite extraordinary. If these 

 remarks appear to you worthy of being inserted in your valuable 

 journal, you will oblige me by doing so. 



Yours trulv, 



Diddin, Jane 10, 1S42. ' J. F. 



BOOKMAKERS' DESCRIPTIONS. 



Sir — Very much to my dissatisfaction, I find that vour Journal has 

 prophesied truly with regard to the "Memorials of Cambridge," for 

 there is nothing that amounts to description at all of Cockerell's new 

 building for the Public Libraries, &c; nor is the view of it as it will 

 appear when completed shown so as to enable one to make out from 

 it what the design really is, the principal front being so exceed- 

 ingly foreshortened that little more than the projecting parts of the 

 elevation are shown. Owing to the portico being taken quite on its 

 flank, one peculiarity — either oddity or original idea on the part of 

 the architect— is not at all discoverable, namely, that it has a central 

 column, consequently no central doorway! — a circumstance in the 

 design so very important as well as unusual that, instead of being 

 concealed, it ought to have been indicated as plainly as possible. At 

 any rate, if concealed in the graphic description of the building, 

 it ought to have been pointed out in the letter-press one ; but the 

 latter turns out, just according to your Journal's prediction, to contain 

 no description at all, although the wrapper of each No. of the work 

 promises " descriptive accounts of the buildings." Perhaps this may 

 have been a misprint on the wrapper of the first No., which has 

 unluckily not been rectified ; and it surely must have been intended 

 that we should read "with historical but no descriptive accounts, &c. 



Of the two editorial M.A.'s, one an Esq. the other a Rev., neither, it 

 seems, knows anything whatever of architecture, or is capable of even 

 describing a building; yet surely one of the two should have been 

 chosen for his competency in regard to drawing up the "descriptive 

 accounts." As it is, it certainly would have been better had no promise 

 whatever of the kind been held out to purchasers. Yet even without 

 positive promise to that elTect, many would, like myself, naturally 



expect to find the buildings shown in the plates explained, if not 

 commented upon, in a tolerably full and satisfactory manner, in the 

 letter-press, which is certainly not done here, save in the solitary 

 exception specified by your own reviewer, and which is, therefore, 

 rather an unfortunate one as far the character of the "Memorials" is 

 concerned, because it renders all the more striking the absence of 

 similar explanation and description in the other subjects. For not 

 again describing what has been repeatedly spoken of before by others, 

 and rendered quite familiar to us in consequence of having been treated 

 of in a variety of publications, there may be some excuse ; but very 

 far different is the case with regard to what may be called " unedited" 

 buildings. One of these is the " Pitt Press," to which may be applied 

 the writer's own words, who tells us, "We possess but a very obscure 

 and defective account of the early history of printing in our Uni- 

 versity," for his account of the structure is equally "obscure and 

 defective." All that we gather from it is that the building was 

 designed by Mr. E Blore, that the first stone was laid in Nov. 1S31, 

 and that it was opened in April, 1S33. To be sure we are favoured 

 with a copy of the inscription on the foundation stone, with the 

 names of the nobs who took a part in the highly important ce- 

 remony of placing it, " Tota inspectante et plauciente academia," 

 which last is merely a bit of solemn bounce — a silly white lie, 

 that contradicts itself, because, even if such were the fact, it could 

 not possibly have been recorded upon the stone until after the cere- 

 mony. A grosser blunder — a more egregious practical Hibernianism 

 — perhaps was never made; and as Mr. Le Keux's editors had not the 

 noui to discover it, they have very innocently shown np that exquisite 

 specimen of University sapience, and swallowed the bull, without 

 making "any bones" of it. As to Mr. Le Keux's own share in the 

 work, I suspect it to be very small indeed, for although his name is 

 attached to the plates as the engraver, none of them seem to have 

 been even touched by him ; else, if they really are his work, they 

 manifest a very great falling off from his former excellence. 



I remain, &c. 



T. W. 



ROYAL ACADEMY EXHIBITION. 



Sir — Observing a letter in your July number, under this head, con- 

 taining complaints from The Aidiitect of a design, the perspective view 

 of which was forwarded by him from a distant county for the purpose 

 of being submitted to the Council or Hanging Committee for exhi- 

 bition this year, and which, in due time, was reported as having been 

 admitted, and afterwards did not appear on the walls of the Royal 

 Academy, and having been treated in precisely the same manner my- 

 self, I deem it right to mention the fact, in hopes that some of your 

 numerous correspondents may be able to suggest some reasonable 

 excuse for such indecision on the part of the Hanging Committee. 



Wiien I hear of letters having been written by the officials of the 

 Royal Academy to some architects who had sent works "obviously 

 varying from the regulations" laid down by the Council, although 

 " the porters are instructed not to receive any " such, in order that, 

 even after the last of the tmo dayx "announced in the public papers 

 for the reception" of "works intended for the annual exhibition," 

 they might have an opportunity of complying with those regulations; 

 when I find that upwards of 40 of the works catalogued under the 

 head of Architecture in this year's exhibition bear no relation what- 

 ever to that noble art ; and, above all, when I find such a moiiniain-in- 

 labour-like title as " No. 1011, Raising the monolitlial granite obelisk 

 between Fleet Street and Ludgate Hill, on the morning of June 26, 

 1S33," and then see the mouse-like production which the reviewer in 

 the Gent.'s Mag. very pithily describes as being the representation of 

 "five labourers, with the aid of a triangle and a pulley, performing 

 the Herculean task of setting this vast obelisk on its pedestal," I con- 

 fess myself quite at a loss to account for the bad faith kept by the 

 Hanging Committee with your correspondent The Architect, and with, 



Sir, 



Your's, faithfully, 



London, July 9. Ego quoque. 



Tunplkf Rnnds. — In 1S18 there existed in England anil AVales paved streets 

 and turnpike-roads to the extent of 10,725 miles, and other public higliways 

 93,104— making altogether 114,829 miles. From the re.icrt of the lords of 

 the committee upon turnpike tnists. it appears that in the year 1829 the 

 extent of turnpike-roads in England was 18,224 miles ; Wales, 2G31 miles ; 

 Scotland, 836 miles — making a total of 25, .511 miles. 



